Extra receptacle for 5 inch "peninsula" countertop?

[dwilson]

Hi folks,

I'm rewiring a 48" x 24" kitchen countertop that has a 5" extension for an old 29" deep dishwasher. If I interpret the extension as a peninsula, I have to install two receptacles (black and red below). If I treat it as a single countertop, than a single receptacle seems fine (black below). Is it better to ask for permission or forgiveness in this situation? Note: I have beautiful plaster walls and hate to cut into them. I also want to avoid adding a receptacle to the switch because it is on a separate circuit.

Thanks

 

[wwhitney]

That is a definite gray area. I wouldn't call that a peninsula, as you are indicating that there are wall on both sides of the corner. If you are under the 2017 NEC, here's the governing text for this question:

210.52(C)(1) Wall Countertop and Work Surface. A receptacle outlet shall be installed at each wall countertop and work surface that is 300 mm (12 in.) or wider. Receptacle outlets shall be installed so that no point along the wall line is more than 600 mm (24 in.) measured horizontally from a receptacle outlet in that space.

I could see inspectors interpreting this either way.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[Sponsor]

 

[dwilson]

Thanks for the feedback, Wayne. I agree it can go both ways based on 210.52(1). I'm going to make it as tidy as possible without the red receptacle. and see where the chips land.

 

[Kreemoweet]

I see nothing in your drawing that could be interpreted as a peninsula.
In any case, the one "black" receptacle is not adequate (by recent NEC rules), as the
entire wall length at the left end is without a recep within the required distance.
It would not be permissible to add a receptacle there, powered by the same circuit
that powers a light switch, it would have to be on a dedicated 20-amp rated small applicance
circuit. But that all presumes that recent NEC rules are even relevant, as those rules do not
retroactively apply to preexisting contruction, as seems to be the case here.

 

[wwhitney]

In any case, the one "black" receptacle is not adequate (by recent NEC rules), as the
entire wall length at the left end is without a recep within the required distance.

I don't think it's quite that simple. Say you have a kitchen that has 24" deep counters everywhere, and along one wall the counters run into a perpendicular wall and stop. Are you going to say that because the 24" edge of the counter is against the wall, the first receptacle has to be in the very corner, to provide coverage for that the 24" edge? I'm fairly sure that would be an unusual interpretation; the usual interpretation would be that there is only one wall line with counter top, and the 24" rule starts at the wall corner.

In contrast, if the counters turn the corner and extend, say, another 36" at the front (so 60" from the wall corner), then it's clear there are two wall lines with counters. The 24" rule starts at the free countertop edge 60" from the wall corner. The square of counter 24" x 24" in the corner gets double coverage, in that the receptacle spacing rules apply to two side of that region. [And I think the usual interpretation is to measure around the wall corner.]

So at some point the first case transitions to the second case. I'm not convinced that the OP's diagram falls in the second case. As one example, suppose you have the first case, but the counters are 30" deep. That would typically be considered still a single wall line of counter top, and so would not require a receptacle on the 30" counter edge.

The only thing that's really clear is that the wording in the NEC is not precise enough to determine these nuances.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[Kreemoweet]

Are you going to say that because the 24" edge of the counter is against the wall, the first receptacle has to be in the very corner, to provide coverage for that the 24" edge?

It's not what I say, it's what the NEC rather plainly says. Whether those rules are commonly "bent" to omit the second required receptacle, I couldn't say. And no one is even going to attempt to put a recep in the "corner."
I've certainly been required over the years to install many receptacles in completely useless locations, due to the design rules in the NEC. The OP's concern about the rules sort of implies there will an inspectorial
judgment in the future, and leaving out the end-wall recep could likely cause some avoidable pain.

 

[Reach4]

How about kitchen counter pop-up receptacles? https://www.popupoutlets.com/p/hubbell-rct200br-kitchen-pop-up-outlet-2-power-splash-proof-brass https://www.zoro.com/hubbell-wiring...acle-surf-nickel-15a-kit-rct200ni/i/G3985027/

Or under-cabinet outlet...

 

[wwhitney]

It's not what I say, it's what the NEC rather plainly says.

We'll have to disagree. I do not find that the language plainly addresses the OP's question, it is open to multiple interpretations (*). Your interpretation and that of the inspectors you've dealt with are not the only interpretations possible.

Cheers, Wayne

(*) One more for you, "the return around the corner is a new wall line to which 210.52(C)(1) is applied separately; since the countertop extension is less than 12" wide, no receptacle is required."

 

[Kreemoweet]

Your interpretation and that of the inspectors you've dealt with are not the only interpretations possible.

Indeed, it's been a subject of extensive debate. The forum discussion linked below would seem to indicate (on last page) that the NEC panel responsible for for the relevant
code section has considered, and rejected, the proposal to disregard counter end-wall length when determining receptacle requirements:
https://forums.mikeholt.com/threads/recept-location-210-52.107267/

 

[wwhitney]

Yes, that's an entertaining read, and you can see that different people have different interpretations. There is even some debate about what the CMP's statement actually means. I would say the CMP statement supports your interpretation, and I couldn't fault a building department for taking that point of view, but I still would say there are multiple defensible interpretations.

If the phrase "no point along the wall line" were instead "no point along any wall line" then I would be inclined to agree with the "include the sidewall" line of thought.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[dwilson]

Hi folks,

Great debate; thanks for humoring me.

3 comments:

(1) I had Wayne's "30 inch counter" argument specifically in mind. One man's 5" extension is another man's 5" reduction, no? Either way, the horizontal reach to the receptacle along the long dimension should by <= 24." I've got that covered.
(2) @Reach4: Cabinet is 27" above the counter, so under cabinet receptacle is a no-go, alas
(3) https://forums.mikeholt.com/threads/recept-location-210-52.107267/ ... Epic! It's not clear anything was resolved, to me.

I'm going with Occam's razor here. It's a 29" counter.

Dal